Suchergebnisse

This study focuses on the Wildlife Management Units in Mexico (UMAs), a market-based policy instrument with coupled objectives of biodiversity conservation and rural development through the sustainable use of wildlife. UMAs have been a success story in terms of number of registrations at the national level, but adoption is unevenly distributed across the rural community in Mexico. We use diffusion of innovation theory - the study of how, why and at what rate ideas and practices are adopted by individuals, groups, organizations, or countries [1]- as the theoretical framework to understand drivers of adoption of UMAs by the rural community in Mexico. We ask: what are the characteristics of UMAs that facilitate or hinder adoption of UMAs?; and do those characteristics vary depending on the target population? We triangulate information from three complementary sources: quantitative information from existing government statistics, qualitative information from a review of relevant literature, and qualitative information from semi-structured phone interviews with key informants. We use general elimination methodology (GEM) [2], a theory-based qualitative evaluation method that seeks to understand the social processes behind the observed outcomes. Theory-based qualitative evaluation methods have been developed in other fields to address attribution of cause and effect when sample sizes are small or there is limited baseline data [3]. Following GEM, we first identify as many as possible alternative explanations or factors influencing adoption of UMAs by reviewing available literature. We then interview key informants from expert groups involved on adoption and implementation of UMAs (e.g. government, NGOs). Finally, we systematically assess whether there is evidence to either validate or rule out each of the possible alternative explanations gathered from the interviews. The results of this research help diagnose the issue of uneven distribution of UMAs across the Mexican rural community, guiding further research on UMAs adoption. This type of research enables practitioners to tailor UMAs to the target population and scale-up conservation through the sustainable use of wildlife where is most needed, and empowers conservation decision makers to achieve their policy objectives. We also hope to spark new directions in conservation research, highlighting the social processes that drive adoption of UMAs by using both an alternative theoretical angle and an innovative methodology within the conservation field. 1. Rogers, E.M., Diffusion of innovations. 2010: New York: Free Press. 2. Scriven, M., A Summative Evaluation of RCT Methodology: & An Alternative Approach to Causal Research. Journal of MultiDisciplinary Evaluation, 2008. 5(9): p. 11-24. 3. White, H. and D. Phillips, Addressing attribution of cause and effect in small n impact evaluations: towards an integrated framework. New Delhi: International Initiative for Impact Evaluation, 2012. ; peerReviewed

Locally-established marine protected areas (MPAs) have been proven to achieve local-scale fisheries and conservation objectives. However, since many of these MPAs were not designed to form ecologically-connected networks, their contributions to broader-scale goals such as complementarity and connectivity can be limited. In contrast, integrated networks of MPAs designed with systematic conservation planning are assumed to be more effective-ecologically, socially, and economically-than collections of locally-established MPAs. There is, however, little empirical evidence that clearly demonstrates the supposed advantages of systematic MPA networks. A key reason is the poor record of implementation of systematic plans attributable to lack of local buy-in. An intermediate scenario for the expansion of MPAs is scaling up of local decisions, whereby locally-driven MPA initiatives are coordinated through collaborative partnerships among local governments and their communities. Coordination has the potential to extend the benefits of individual MPAs and perhaps to approach the potential benefits offered by systematic MPA networks. We evaluated the benefits of scaling up local MPAs to form networks by simulating seven expansion scenarios for MPAs in the Verde Island Passage, central Philippines. The scenarios were: uncoordinated community-based establishment of MPAs; two scenarios reflecting different levels of coordinated MPA expansion through collaborative partnerships; and four scenarios guided by systematic conservation planning with different contexts for governance. For each scenario, we measured benefits through time in terms of achievement of objectives for representation of marine habitats. We found that: in any governance context, systematic networks were more efficient than non-systematic ones; systematic networks were more efficient in broader governance contexts; and, contrary to expectations but with caveats, the uncoordinated scenario was slightly more efficient than the coordinated scenarios. Overall, ...

Conservation biology was founded on the idea that efforts to save nature depend on a scientific understanding of how it works. It sought to apply ecological principles to conservation problems. We investigated whether the relationship between these fields has changed over time through machine reading the full texts of 32,000 research articles published in 16 ecology and conservation biology journals. We examined changes in research topics in both fields and how the fields have evolved from 2000 to 2014. As conservation biology matured, its focus shifted from ecology to social and political aspects of conservation. The 2 fields diverged and now occupy distinct niches in modern science. We hypothesize this pattern resulted from increasing recognition that social, economic, and political factors are critical for successful conservation and possibly from rising skepticism about the relevance of contemporary ecological theory to practical conservation.

Coordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível Superior (CAPES) ; CAPES: 417/2010 ; This paper examines barriers and opportunities for climate change adaptation in an urban coastal setting where adaptation is in its infancy. It draws on a diagnostic framework as a foundation for identifying and organising barriers and opportunities in terms of three broad phases of the adaptation process, i.e. (1) understanding the problem, (2) planning adaptation options and (3) managing implementation of such options. Data come from the analysis of documents (e.g. policy, plans and reports) and a survey of 49 representatives from 42 organisations (e.g. government, environmental non-governmental organisations, businesses and local industry and professional associations). Nineteen barriers and/or opportunities pertaining to the different phases of the adaptation process were identified. Three of those barriers (i.e. competing priorities, existing management context and existing ecological context) are our additions to the initial list of common barriers proposed in the diagnostic framework. Barriers pertaining to the understanding phase were the most frequently noted by respondents. The understanding phase was also one which most of the barriers were nevertheless considered as opportunities. Emerging critical barriers and/or opportunities for climate change adaptation included perception of signal, availability and accessibility of information, existing management context and leadership. We propose that addressing these barriers and opportunities would involve improving perception about climate change and availability and accessibility of information, fostering anticipatory planned adaptation through the existing management context and developing leadership for adaptation. Findings from this study may prove useful to other jurisdictions, particularly those where climate adaptation is at its early stages of development.

Conservation biology was founded on the idea that efforts to save nature depend on a scientific understanding of how it works. It sought to apply ecological principles to conservation problems. We investigated whether the relationship between these fields has changed over time through machine reading the full texts of 32,000 research articles published in 16 ecology and conservation biology journals. We examined changes in research topics in both fields and how the fields have evolved from 2000 to 2014. As conservation biology matured, its focus shifted from ecology to social and political aspects of conservation. The 2 fields diverged and now occupy distinct niches in modern science. We hypothesize this pattern resulted from increasing recognition that social, economic, and political factors are critical for successful conservation and possibly from rising skepticism about the relevance of contemporary ecological theory to practical conservation.

Rapid sea level rise over the 21st century threatens coastal settlements and populations worldwide. Significant land-use policy reform will be needed to mitigate exposure to hazards in the coastal zone. Sea-level rise maps that indicate areas that are potentially prone to future inundation are a valuable tool for policymakers and decision makers. However, errors, assumptions, and uncertainties inherent in spatial data are not often explicitly recognised or communicated. In 2011, the state of Queensland, Australia, published a series of 'state of the art' sea-level rise maps as part of its coastal planning regime. This article uses the Queensland coastal planning regime as a case study to explore how errors, uncertainties and variability in physical, geographical and biological processes in the coastal zone pose challenges for policy makers. Analysis of the case study shows that the use of spatial data in sea-level rise policy formulation is complicated by the need to: (1) acknowledge and communicate uncertainties in existing and projected rates of rise; (2) engage in site-specific mapping based upon best available scientific information; (3) incorporate probabilities of extreme weather events; (4) resolve whether coastal engineering solutions should be included in mapping; (5) ensure that mapping includes areas required for future ecosystem migration; (6) manage discretion in planning and policy decision-making processes; (7) create flexible policies which can be updated in line with scientific developments; and (8) balance the need for consistency with the ability to apply developments in science and technology. Scientists working with spatial data and governments developing and implementing coastal planning policies can recognise, communicate, and seek to overcome uncertainty by addressing these factors.

An integrated understanding of both social and ecological aspects of environmental issues is essential to address pressing sustainability challenges. An integrated social-ecological systems perspective is purported to provide a better understanding of the complex relationships between humans and nature. Despite a threefold increase in the amount of social-ecological research published between 2010 and 2015, it is unclear whether these approaches have been truly integrative. We conducted a systematic literature review to investigate the conceptual, methodological, disciplinary, and functional aspects of social-ecological integration. In general, we found that overall integration is still lacking in social-ecological research. Some social variables deemed important for addressing sustainability challenges are underrepresented in social-ecological studies, e.g., culture, politics, and power. Disciplines such as ecology, urban studies, and geography are better integrated than others, e.g., sociology, biology, and public administration. In addition to ecology and urban studies, biodiversity conservation plays a key brokerage role in integrating other disciplines into social-ecological research. Studies founded on systems theory have the highest rates of integration. Highly integrative studies combine different types of tools, involve stakeholders at appropriate stages, and tend to deliver practical recommendations. Better social-ecological integration must underpin sustainability science. To achieve this potential, future social-ecological research will require greater attention to the following: the interdisciplinary composition of project teams, strategic stakeholder involvement, application of multiple tools, incorporation of both social and ecological variables, consideration of bidirectional relationships between variables, and identification of implications and articulation of clear policy recommendations.

International audience ; An integrated understanding of both social and ecological aspects of environmental issues is essential to address pressing sustainability challenges. An integrated social-ecological systems perspective is purported to provide a better understanding of the complex relationships between humans and nature. Despite a threefold increase in the amount of social-ecological research published between 2010 and 2015, it is unclear whether these approaches have been truly integrative. We conducted a systematic literature review to investigate the conceptual, methodological, disciplinary, and functional aspects of social-ecological integration. In general, we found that overall integration is still lacking in social-ecological research. Some social variables deemed important for addressing sustainability challenges are underrepresented in social-ecological studies, e.g., culture, politics, and power. Disciplines such as ecology, urban studies, and geography are better integrated than others, e.g., sociology, biology, and public administration. In addition to ecology and urban studies, biodiversity conservation plays a key brokerage role in integrating other disciplines into social-ecological research. Studies founded on systems theory have the highest rates of integration. Highly integrative studies combine different types of tools, involve stakeholders at appropriate stages, and tend to deliver practical recommendations. Better social-ecological integration must underpin sustainability science. To achieve this potential, future social-ecological research will require greater attention to the following: the interdisciplinary composition of project teams, strategic stakeholder involvement, application of multiple tools, incorporation of both social and ecological variables, consideration of bidirectional relationships between variables, and identification of implications and articulation of clear policy recommendations.

International audience ; An integrated understanding of both social and ecological aspects of environmental issues is essential to address pressing sustainability challenges. An integrated social-ecological systems perspective is purported to provide a better understanding of the complex relationships between humans and nature. Despite a threefold increase in the amount of social-ecological research published between 2010 and 2015, it is unclear whether these approaches have been truly integrative. We conducted a systematic literature review to investigate the conceptual, methodological, disciplinary, and functional aspects of social-ecological integration. In general, we found that overall integration is still lacking in social-ecological research. Some social variables deemed important for addressing sustainability challenges are underrepresented in social-ecological studies, e.g., culture, politics, and power. Disciplines such as ecology, urban studies, and geography are better integrated than others, e.g., sociology, biology, and public administration. In addition to ecology and urban studies, biodiversity conservation plays a key brokerage role in integrating other disciplines into social-ecological research. Studies founded on systems theory have the highest rates of integration. Highly integrative studies combine different types of tools, involve stakeholders at appropriate stages, and tend to deliver practical recommendations. Better social-ecological integration must underpin sustainability science. To achieve this potential, future social-ecological research will require greater attention to the following: the interdisciplinary composition of project teams, strategic stakeholder involvement, application of multiple tools, incorporation of both social and ecological variables, consideration of bidirectional relationships between variables, and identification of implications and articulation of clear policy recommendations.

International audience ; An integrated understanding of both social and ecological aspects of environmental issues is essential to address pressing sustainability challenges. An integrated social-ecological systems perspective is purported to provide a better understanding of the complex relationships between humans and nature. Despite a threefold increase in the amount of social-ecological research published between 2010 and 2015, it is unclear whether these approaches have been truly integrative. We conducted a systematic literature review to investigate the conceptual, methodological, disciplinary, and functional aspects of social-ecological integration. In general, we found that overall integration is still lacking in social-ecological research. Some social variables deemed important for addressing sustainability challenges are underrepresented in social-ecological studies, e.g., culture, politics, and power. Disciplines such as ecology, urban studies, and geography are better integrated than others, e.g., sociology, biology, and public administration. In addition to ecology and urban studies, biodiversity conservation plays a key brokerage role in integrating other disciplines into social-ecological research. Studies founded on systems theory have the highest rates of integration. Highly integrative studies combine different types of tools, involve stakeholders at appropriate stages, and tend to deliver practical recommendations. Better social-ecological integration must underpin sustainability science. To achieve this potential, future social-ecological research will require greater attention to the following: the interdisciplinary composition of project teams, strategic stakeholder involvement, application of multiple tools, incorporation of both social and ecological variables, consideration of bidirectional relationships between variables, and identification of implications and articulation of clear policy recommendations.